List Custom Property Select Values

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already establish read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior. The description adds valuable behavioral details beyond that: return fields, empty array for non-select types instead of 400, and the 404 meaning. These edge cases materially affect how an agent should interpret responses.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is dense but every sentence earns its place: when to use it, where the parameter comes from, what it returns, and edge-case behavior. There is no filler or repetition of schema content.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With no output schema, the description supplies the return fields and both meaningful error/empty-result scenarios. Given the tool's simple read-only nature and the strong annotation coverage, nothing critical is missing for correct invocation.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100% and both parameters already have descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The description adds practical provenance for propertyId and explains the consequence of passing arbitrary integers, going beyond what the schema alone provides.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description uses a specific verb and resource: 'Get the valid select / multi_select values for a custom property.' It clearly distinguishes this from sibling tools by explaining the propertyId source and its role before kaiten_update_card.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description explicitly says to use this BEFORE writing the `properties` map via kaiten_update_card for select/multi_select fields. It also directs the agent to source propertyId from kaiten_list_custom_properties, filter by select/multi_select type, and check the property type before interpreting results.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.